Friends

[DHP]

and the 40-disc James Bond movies collection. It hurts your wallet, but a lot less than to buy them all separately. And the packaging is always nicer when you get them in a box set.

Oooh you've got the Bond set! A job well done, good sir! I want that too, but I can't look beyond the price.

Neither could I until I saw HMV had shaved £170 off it in their sale. I used a price-comparison site and saw they were beating everone else by at least £50. Picked it up right there and then. It really is a thing of beauty! £99.99 is a bargain for that much entertainment. Assuming you like Bond films of course.

I'd suggest picking up at least Goldeneye and Tomorrow Never Dies. The ultimate editions are uncut versions and both rated 15 now instead of 12 as a result. Not watched them yet, but looking forward to it!

[Nervosa]

Neither could I until I saw HMV had shaved £170 off it in their sale. I used a price-comparison site and saw they were beating everone else by at least £50. Picked it up right there and then. It really is a thing of beauty! £99.99 is a bargain for that much entertainment. Assuming you like Bond films of course.

Oh I didn't realise it was down to £100. Last time I looked at it seriously in the shops and it was almost double that. Hmmmm, I'm considering it now! I only own a few Bond films on VHS. I'd love to own them all on DVD.

[DHP]

Neither could I until I saw HMV had shaved £170 off it in their sale. I used a price-comparison site and saw they were beating everone else by at least £50. Picked it up right there and then. It really is a thing of beauty! £99.99 is a bargain for that much entertainment. Assuming you like Bond films of course.

Oh I didn't realise it was down to £100. Last time I looked at it seriously in the shops and it was almost double that. Hmmmm, I'm considering it now! I only own a few Bond films on VHS. I'd love to own them all on DVD.

Shocked me when I saw it for that price too. The double-disc ultimate editions really are excellent in terms of the presentation of the films and the extras. As I said above, some of the films are uncut versions too, never before seen in the UK. Oh, and the packaging is gorgeous!

[DHP]

This is HMV's online store btw, not their in-store price.

[Stratman]

The West Wing series collections is also unbelievable value. Cost me 230 AUS. Unlike the original releases there are no double sided discs, the boxset is far superior, and it's much cheaper.

[DHP]

The West Wing series collections is also unbelievable value. Cost me 230 AUS. Unlike the original releases there are no double sided discs, the boxset is far superior, and it's much cheaper. [/i]

Takes up less shelf space too doesn't it? I hear there's also a couple of discs of extras too, which the individual releases were sadly lacking. Not a fan of extras anymore as they're all a bit samey, but I'd have loved to see some interview footage with the cast and crew of this wonderful show.

I keep toying with the idea of trading in my individual releases on eBay and getting the box set. I did it with my Only Fools & Horses collection and it only cost me a tenner or so overall when you subtract what you get off eBay from the cost of the new set.

[Nervosa]

Not a fan of extras anymore as they're all a bit samey,

I'm a bit like that too. As soon as the ends credits role on a DVD, I click the menu button and go straight to 'special features'. I usually always regret it because when you next watch the movie, you notice annoying trivial things (like the prop designer put that log there to hide a cable, and if you look closely, you can see the cable) which distract. At the same time, I love hearing more about the characters and directorial tactics.

[Stratman]

I'm not sure that it takes up that much less space shelf, but it's the sexiest boxset I own. I don't quite know what to think of the way the discs are stored in faux folders, though. It certainly looks great stored, but they're not as practical when transporting.

I'm not really a huge fan of featurettes, but I love commentaries.

Btw, do people store their discs in CD wallets or in the boxsets?

[Nervosa]

Btw, do people store their discs in CD wallets or in the boxsets?

I always keep it the way I bought it. And my collection is in alphabetical order (but I'm thinking of arranging according to genre).

[Stratman]

Btw, do people store their discs in CD wallets or in the boxsets?

I always keep it the way I bought it. And my collection is in alphabetical order (but I'm thinking of arranging according to genre).

I was doing it according to genre at one point, but I don't have a proper DVD storage unit, so I just have to stick them where there is space.

[Wezzo]

I keep DVDs the way I bought them too.

I have a cupboard dedicated to US sitcom, three drawers dedicated to animated sitcom and UK sitcom, a plastic container of US drama, a plastic container of UK drama and music DVDs, and a plastic container of movies.

[Cake for Brains]

I generally keep DVD's as they come, but I do keep my discs from the first series of Doctor Who in plastic wallets, because I tend to avoid touching the bulky TARDIS case, because it's likely to fall to pieces at any moment, despite looking after it very well. I just keep my DVD's on a bookcase.

Regarding Friends, I don't feel that I have enough experience of it to justify voting. I've only seen about 2 episodes, which didn't do anything for me at all. I keep intending to give it a go, but when I sit down to watch it, I just change my mind.

[Mr Blue Sky]

I voted 'hate it' but that's not entirely fair because I did used to be a fan during seasons 1 and 2. I think it was the 2nd ep of season 3 (the one where no one's ready, which is probably the ep title too ) when I realised I didn't like a single character on screen in front of me. I only watched it sporadically from then on and I don't think I've seen a single episode after season 5.

I know they had good writers on staff, but for me Friends couldn't lace Frasier's boots.

[Bad Ambassador]

when I realised I didn't like a single character on screen in front of me.

That probably sums it up for me too. Whenever I happen to catch it I just sit there thinking "what a bunch of wankers!"

[roz11]

Will never be as good as Frasier, but still enjoyable gets my vote.

[Amber]

I voted "still enjoyable." Friends is definetly more consistant. While Frasier has some amazing episodes (Ham Radio) and some pretty bad ones (WOTW) Friends episodes are pretty much always halfway inbetween. (Although I'd say the average Frasier is above the average Friends.

I reckon it's because the plots are usualy very seperate. With Friends there's usualy three or four plots going on with different characers or in pairs. (with exceptions, like the Thanksgiving episodes, which usualy have all 6 together) while in Frasier, usualy it's just the one big plot following each character's different roles in the plot.

[Mr Blue Sky]

"what a bunch of wankers!"

That sums it up better!

[me123]

I reckon it's because the plots are usualy very seperate. With Friends there's usualy three or four plots going on with different characers or in pairs. (with exceptions, like the Thanksgiving episodes, which usualy have all 6 together) while in Frasier, usualy it's just the one big plot following each character's different roles in the plot.

Is it not true though that, in a stand-alone episode, the typical fromat for Frasier is Primary Story-Secondary Story-Collision at climactic moment for humerous effect (hot'n'foamy being a good example of this trend). Whereas, in Friends, it is rarer for the storylines to combine.

I'd also like to say, however, that in both sitcoms, the storylines are generally:

Primary= Serious (releativly)
Secondary= HUmerous and Silly (to an extent)

[Mr Blue Sky]

I reckon it's because the plots are usualy very seperate. With Friends there's usualy three or four plots going on with different characers or in pairs. (with exceptions, like the Thanksgiving episodes, which usualy have all 6 together) while in Frasier, usualy it's just the one big plot following each character's different roles in the plot.

Is it not true though that, in a stand-alone episode, the typical fromat for Frasier is Primary Story-Secondary Story-Collision at climactic moment for humerous effect (hot'n'foamy being a good example of this trend). Whereas, in Friends, it is rarer for the storylines to combine.

I'd also like to say, however, that in both sitcoms, the storylines are generally:

Primary= Serious (releativly)
Secondary= HUmerous and Silly (to an extent)

I think that's true. From what I remember of Friends they very rarely combined the primary and secondary story arcs at the episode's climax. but on Frasier that happened quite a bit. Martin does It His Way is another example of how two seemingly unconnected story threads are brought together for the episode's climax.

[Davey Boy]

I reckon it's because the plots are usualy very seperate. With Friends there's usualy three or four plots going on with different characers or in pairs. (with exceptions, like the Thanksgiving episodes, which usualy have all 6 together) while in Frasier, usualy it's just the one big plot following each character's different roles in the plot.

Is it not true though that, in a stand-alone episode, the typical fromat for Frasier is Primary Story-Secondary Story-Collision at climactic moment for humerous effect (hot'n'foamy being a good example of this trend). Whereas, in Friends, it is rarer for the storylines to combine.

I'd also like to say, however, that in both sitcoms, the storylines are generally:

Primary= Serious (releativly)
Secondary= HUmerous and Silly (to an extent)

I think that's true. From what I remember of Friends they very rarely combined the primary and secondary story arcs at the episode's climax. but on Frasier that happened quite a bit. Martin does It His Way is another example of how two seemingly unconnected story threads are brought together for the episode's climax.

Friends rarely combines story lines at the end of the show. There are usually two or three plots going at once which will be resolved in the final 2/3 scenes (the primary plot being the final one to be concluded in most cases). The final scene will usually be slightly random but link in with the story in a small way, and used purley for a humour, which I guess is similar to Frasier.

[Stratman]

The show runs on the A/B/C plot formula. It's all very fast, and it works.

[DHP]

The show runs on the A/B/C plot formula. It's all very fast, and it works.

That's it for me. I agree, the two are different, but I see them both as being just as good as each other.

[me123]

The show runs on the A/B/C plot formula. It's all very fast, and it works.

That's it for me. I agree, the two are different, but I see them both as being just as good as each other.

I personally prefer the "Frasier" formula, but both work well: it's a matter of personal preference.

[DHP]

I think that's the bottom line: personal preference. While I enjoy both of these comedies equally, there are other sitcoms which are very popular which I can't stand to watch for any length of time, such as Little Britain or South Park (though I admit both can make me laugh on occasion). While the shows might be popular, I personally really don't like them. That's no reflection or criticism of how well the shows are made, or of their fans by the way.

[Cake for Brains]

It doesn't look like it's my cup of tea, but I should give it a go before I vote on this poll.

Which season is considered as the best?